Explore the vast range of titles available.

Invasive species stimulate science through problem-oriented research but only a small portion of studies have discussed the impacts of biological invasions upon the science itself. Three of the ten currently recognized species of the coral genus Tubastraea are invasive and have attracted substantial research attention. Using a bibliographic survey and bibliometric approach we synthesized knowledge to examine if invasion events lead to an increase and intensification of research not mirrored in the native range. More than twice as many studies of the genus were performed in the nonnative ranges than native, most being original research recently published in the conventional literature. Brazil and the United States of America (Gulf of Mexico) (nonnative range) were most studied with oil and gas platforms the main (49%) focus of pathway and vector research. Ecological processes such as recruitment, survivorship, larval settlement, and population abundance and structure, were proportionally more studied in nonnative ranges, as were competitive interactions. This synthesis of the set of knowledge that is available about Tubastraea spp. demonstrates that invasion biology is a highly pragmatic science and as the genus has expanded its range through the world the scientific community has increasingly focused its attention on the invasion which has provided science, management and stakeholders with a wide body of information on many basic and applied aspects of the biology and ecology of the species.

Conventional graduate training related to tropical conservation and development has typically separated the two fields, with students focusing on either conservation from the perspective of the biophysical sciences or development as an extension of the social sciences. On entering the workforce, however, graduates find they are required to work beyond disciplinary boundaries to address the complex interconnectivity between biological conservation and human well-being. We devised a framework for graduate education that broadens students' skill sets to learn outside their immediate disciplines and think in terms of linked socioecological systems, work in teams, communicate in nonacademic formats, and reflect critically on their own perspectives and actions. The University of Florida's Tropical Conservation and Development program has adopted a learning and action platform that blends theory, skills, and praxis to create an intellectual, social, and professionally safe space where students, faculty, and other participants can creatively address the complex challenges of tropical conservation and development. This platform operates within a nondegree-granting program and includes core courses that are taught by a team of biophysical and social scientists. It incorporates a range of alternative learning spaces such as student-led workshops, retreats, visiting professionals, practitioner experiences, and a weekly student-led seminar that collectively encourage students and faculty to enhance their skills and systematically and thoroughly reflect on program activities. Challenges to the described approach include increased service demands on faculty, a redefinition of research excellence to include effective and equitable collaboration with host-country partners, and the trade-offs and uncertainties inherent in more collaborative, interdisciplinary research. Despite these challenges, growing interdisciplinary programs, coupled with adaptive educational approaches that emphasize learning and action networks of students, faculty, and field partners, provide the best hope for responding to the emerging challenges of tropical conservation and development.

Environmental problems caused by human activities are increasing; biodiversity is disappearing at an unprecedented rate, soils are being irreversibly damaged, freshwater is increasingly in short supply, and the climate is changing. To reverse or even to reduce these trends will require a radical transformation in the relationship between humans and the natural environment. Just how this can be achieved within, at most, a few decades is unknown, but it is clear that academia must play a crucial role. Many believe, however, that academic institutions need to become more effective in helping societies move toward sustainability. We first synthesize current thinking about this crisis of research effectiveness. We argue that those involved in producing knowledge to solve societal problems face three particular challenges: the complexity of real-world sustainability problems, maintaining impartiality when expert knowledge is used in decision making, and ensuring the salience of the scientific knowledge for decision makers. We discuss three strategies to meet these challenges: conducting research in interdisciplinary teams, forming research partnerships with actors and experts from outside academia, and framing research questions with the aim of solving specific problems (problem orientation). However, we argue that implementing these strategies within academia will require both cultural and institutional change. We then use concepts from transition management to suggest how academic institutions can make the necessary changes. At the level of system optimization, we call for: quality criteria, career incentives, and funding schemes that reward not only disciplinary excellence but also achievements in inter-/transdisciplinary work; professional services and training through specialized centers that facilitate problem-oriented research and reciprocal knowledge exchange with society; and the integration of sustainability and inter-/transdisciplinary research practices into all teaching curricula. At the level of system innovation, we propose radical changes in institutional structures, research and career incentives, teaching programs, and research partnerships. We see much value in a view of change that emphasizes the complementarity of system innovation and system optimization. The goal must be a process of change that preserves the traditional strengths of academic research, with its emphasis on disciplinary excellence and scientific rigor, while ensuring that institutional environments and the skills, worldviews, and experiences of the involved actors adapt to the rapidly changing needs of society.

It has been more than a decade since Jamil Salmi, former tertiary education coordinator at the World Bank, published his influential report Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary Education.1 In this report, he discusses the unprecedented challenges facing tertiary education globally, driven by the ‘convergence of the impacts of globalization; the increasing importance of knowledge as a principle driver of growth; and the information and communication revolution’1. Since then, these factors have been further intensified by the rise of various global university ranking systems that are increasingly driving the choices of academics, students, industries and governments of where to invest their talents and funds.

Reaktion auf J. Mittelstraß in GAIA 27/2 (2018) und W. Krohn et al. in GAIA 26/4 (2017)

Purpose - The paper shows that current research systems are not geared to organise and evaluate research involving several scientific disciplines. A consequence is exaggerated promises and expectations based on \"speculative interdisciplinarity\". These expectations are one cause of \"speculative ethics\". Evaluators of interdisciplinary research proposals should be aware of the pitfalls existing in this kind of research. The purpose of this paper is to highlight \"speculative interdisciplinarity\" as a cause of exaggerated expectations with the result that ethical analysis and similar activities focus on unlikely impacts.Design methodology approach - The paper confronts documented statements of champions of emerging technologies with assessments by specialists from the scientific disciplines involved in the development of the technologies and examines the extent to which differences are due to problems with interdisciplinary work.Findings - The paper identifies the causes of exaggerated expectations related to the impact of emerging technologies based on interdisciplinary research. Lack of experience with interdisciplinary research is shown to be a major cause.Research limitations implications - This is basically a case study for a spectacular individual example. There is a need to show that the same problems exist for less spectacular scientific endeavours.Practical implications - Review process organisers and reviewers should be aware that exaggerated expectations can arise as a result of insufficient attention to the organisation of interdisciplinary research. There is a need for studies to confront expectations with the genuine state of research.Originality value - The paper highlights a need to pay attention to the organisation of interdisciplinary research.

The article provides a general overview of social sciences perspectives to analyze and theorize climate research, climate discourse, and climate policy. First, referring to the basic paradigm of sociology, it points out the feasible scope and necessary methodology of environmental sociology as a social science concerning the analysis of physical nature. Second, it illustrates this epistemological conception by few examples, summarizing main results of corresponding climate-related social science investigations dealing with the development dynamics of climate research, the role of scientific (climate impact) assessments in politics, varying features and changes of climate discourses, climate policy formation, and knowledge diffusion from climate science. The receptivity of climate discourse and climate policy to the results of problem-oriented climate research is strongly shaped and limited by its multifarious character as well as by their own (internal) logics. The article shows that social sciences contribute their specific (conceptual) competences to problem-oriented research by addressing climate change and corresponding adaptation and mitigation strategies.

This chapter contains section titled: The Electronic Surround: How it Changes Social Information and Action Patterns The Role of Universities in a Global Electronic Society Discussion References Cited

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Suicide prevention is a public health priority, but no data on the health care individuals receive prior to death are available from large representative United States population samples. OBJECTIVE To investigate variation in the types and timing of health services received in the year prior to suicide, and determine whether a mental health condition was diagnosed. DESIGN Longitudinal study from 2000 to 2010 within eight Mental Health Research Network health care systems serving eight states. PARTICIPANTS In all, 5,894 individuals who died by suicide, and were health plan members in the year before death. MAIN MEASURES Health system contacts in the year before death. Medical record, insurance claim, and mortality records were linked via the Virtual Data Warehouse, a federated data system at each site. KEY RESULTS Nearly all individuals received health care in the year prior to death (83 %), but half did not have a mental health diagnosis. Only 24 % had a mental health diagnosis in the 4-week period prior to death. Medical specialty and primary care visits without a mental health diagnosis were the most common visit types. The individuals more likely to make a visit in the year prior to death ( p  < 0.05) tended to be women, individuals of older age (65+ years), those where the neighborhood income was over $40,000 and 25 % were college graduates, and those who died by non-violent means. CONCLUSIONS This study indicates that opportunities for suicide prevention exist in primary care and medical settings, where most individuals receive services prior to death. Efforts may target improved identification of mental illness and suicidal ideation, as a large proportion may remain undiagnosed at death.

Today, all important and influential decisions must be based on the research finding. Research serves as a pioneer and foundation for precise and targeted planning and decision-making. The acceleration of applying and implementing health research finding, particularly in non-communicable diseases (NCDs), is crucial as it relates to the promotion of public health and improving the health and well-being of the population. This requires attention to a knowledge and evidence-based decision-making ecosystem. The present study aims to identify the perspectives of decision-makers in Iran’s research system regarding prerequisites, barriers and facilitators affecting the implementation of research findings in the field of non-communicable diseases. This qualitative study employed a purposive sampling method with 21 individuals who met predefined criteria. Interviews were conducted until data saturation was achieved. The interviews were conducted virtually and in person with deputy head of research and technology in medical sciences universities, managers of research development and evaluation, directors of research centers, head of medical information management and scientific resources centers, policymakers, researchers, and experts in knowledge implementation in the NCDs field. Thematic analysis and open coding with the MAXQDA software was employed for data analysis. Subsequently, a survey form was used to gather expert opinions on refining the coding process. Of the participants, 62% were male and 38% were female. Additionally, 52% were deputy head of research and technology, research managers, and directors of research centers, while 38% were policymakers and a few were researchers in NCDs field. The thematic analysis of the 21 interviews resulted in 591 codes, which were ultimately categorized into eight main categories and 56 subcategories. Two categories: “Scientific leadership (Research Railing)”, and “Strengthening and developing responsive policies” were identified as basic requirements, Four categories: “Designing, updating and upgrading health information systems”, “Designing, compiling and presenting organizational mechanisms”, “Information facilitation”, and “Provision financial resource and providing an economic platform” were identified as facilitators, while two categories: “Political Barriers” and “Organizational/Trans-organizational challenges” were identified as challenges impacting the implementation of research finding. The study’s findings indicate that to implement research finding, overarching policies within the country’s research system require Serious action. However, there are challenges in the implementation process that, if ignored, could pose threats. Each identified influencing factor in this study has independent potential to impact. Health system managers and policymakers in the NCDs field can leverage the findings of this study- which align with the expectations of research and technology vice presidents and managers at universities- in their future planning and policymaking related to strengthening a problem-oriented research approach and utilizing implementation science.